Investigate Earth Conspiracy Podcast - Moon Landing Debate Reignites, Bart Sibrel on Confronting Apollo Astronaut Charlie Duke

Episode Date: January 20, 2026

In this episode, we welcome back investigative journalist and filmmaker Bart Sibrel for his second appearance on the podcast. Bart has spent decades questioning the official Apollo moon landing narrative through documentaries, books, and public debates, making him one of the most controversial voices in the moon landing discussion. This conversation centers on Bart’s recent fiery appearance on the Danny Jones podcast, where he confronted Apollo astronaut Charlie Duke in a tense exchange that has reignited global debate. We break down what happened during that interview, the arguments raised on both sides, and why the moon landing controversy continues to divide people more than fifty years later. From Cold War politics and NASA’s Apollo program to media narratives and public trust, this episode explores why the moon landing remains one of the most hotly debated events in modern history. Whether you believe the missions were real or have lingering doubts, this is a conversation you won’t want to miss.Our Merchandise Store

Smiley faces in the paper. Counting corners till we get to any place. But where I'm at every exit's getting louder, I'd assure you that it's nothing. But you never saw it coming. Hello and welcome back to Investigator's podcast. I'm your host, Chad, alongside my beautiful wife, Sherry. On tonight's episode, it's a big one, because,

Joining us again is investigative journalist and filmmaker Bart Sabrell. Bart has spent decades challenging the official narrative of the Apollo moon landings, producing documentaries, writing books, and asking questions that many say should have been asked a long time ago. And whether you agree with him or not, there's no denying that he's one of the most well-known and controversial figures in the entire Moonlanding debate. And this is now a second time sitting down with us. This time we're diving straight into the firestorm surrounding Bart's recent appearance on the Danny Jones podcast, where tensions exploded during his conversation with Apollo astronaut Charlie Duke. That interview lit up the internet, re-igniting the argument over NASA's Apollo and what really

happened during humanity's most famous space missions. Guys, welcome to the show. The name of this song is part of me by Henny Hun. And it is January 19th, 2026. Bart, welcome back to the show. And how have you been? I've been doing okay. How about you two, Chad and Jerry?

We are doing pretty good. Like I said, it's gotten pretty cold. but we're ready for spring at least. I don't really like 100 plus degrees, but I don't like it 30 degrees either. So we'll be good. So a lot of people have reached out to us after your appearance on the Danny Jones podcast where you set down with Charlie Duke,

a, I guess, famed astronaut from one of the Apollo, the Apollo Moon mission, actually. And I actually just found out that he is from South Carolina, which is where we're from. And I think he only lives a couple of hours from us. But what kind of got that conversation? Like, how did that all even take place and happen? Was it Danny that set it up?

Was it you? Or how'd that go? Well, after I did my first interview with Danny Jones, I think that was in March of last year. He suggested that I debate somebody for the next episode. And my thoughts are I don't want to debate victims of the deception. I want to debate perpetrators. Yeah. So I said, if you could get me an Apollo astronaut or an NASA administrator, I'll be glad to debate.

But I'm not going to debate people born after the fact who have worshipping, you know, a false idol who are victims of the, you know, molesting a scoutmaster rather than, you know, confronting the scoutmaster. Yeah. Because people have Stockholm syndrome. They keep defending corrupt government officials because they gave them. something pleasant, a flattering moon landing. Your team won the Super Bowl, and I come along saying the opposite. So I suggested Charles Duke, I think Buzz Aldrin probably would have done a worse job, which would have made me look better. Maybe that would have been my first choice. But I particularly chose Charles Duke because he's the only Apollo astronaut who claims

that he's a Christian, claiming he has a ministry and all this stuff. I do my best and fail most of the time in my walk to say that I'm a Christian, and I don't go around boasting that I'm a Christian, but if someone asks me, am I? I say, well, I try. However, I find it offensive as someone who has read the Bible all the way through, who believes with all my heart in the Messiah and God and a judgment to come, knowing for certain that they did fake them in landing, and for one of them to add the stamp of Christianity as some sort of seal of approval, you must now, therefore, believe his lies because he says he's a Christian. I find that highly offensive.

So that's why I chose him. Now, he may be the best liar, but he's still a liar. And it's pretty sad that that's the case. Yeah. Now, one of the things that Danny Jones, you know, could have done differently is he believes privately, although it's not exactly private, that the moon landings were falsified. And they were falsified. And we can go into all that if you want. But he was also concerned what he, I think the words he used, he didn't want his podcast turning into the Jerry Springer show.

And having made a second film where I confronted a bunch of the astronauts on camera, and one of them punched me, one of them kicked me, one of them threatened to shoot me, one of them on a hot microphone accidentally left on, threatened to have the CIA assassinate me. So he wanted to make sure that didn't happen. And so he was overly delicate and handled the lying traitor to our name. with kit gloves, I believe more than he should. He told me afterwards that he prepped Charles Duke with answers and told him all the questions. It basically prepared him for the debate.

You know, it's not really a debate if the moderator is, you know, helping one team, you know, coaching them on how to reply. He basically coached him. on how to reply to my truthful accusations, which was inappropriate. And then multiple times during the four-hour interview, I asked Charles Duke difficult questions, and Danny Jones interjects and answers the difficult question for him over and over and over again. That's not a moderator either. You can't imagine a debate between Trump and Biden and the moderator constantly answering the difficult questions for one of them. throughout the whole debate.

And that's what he did. That kind of has happened, Bart, actually. With Joe Biden. Yeah. That kind of actually did happen, you know, when Joe Biden didn't have the right answer or Trump had a certain answer. And the moderator would just kind of like negate whatever Trump said and prop up whatever Biden said. We all, anyways, that is kind of how awesome.

Whether or not that happened is not so much the issue as it is whether or not it's fair. Right. And, you know, Danny Jones is a great person, very like. guy and very sincere. The problem is he overreacted. He was very fearful that something bad might happen during the show and it might make him look bad. So he overly compensated for that by preparing the guy. He basically told Charles Duke, you know, all the points that I would bring up during the discussion in advance. And he, he, reminded him, by the way, ten times. I think they had ten telephone conversations prior to the debate and or our interview. And he, of course, knew very well, I'm the person who says we didn't go to the moon.

Yeah. One minute, one minute before the recording started, Charles Duke reminds me of a private telephone conversation he and I had 20 years ago where he quote, quoted me word for word as the guy who knows that they didn't go to the moon. So the fact that he acted like he didn't know I was the guy who said we didn't go to the moon five times during the interview when he reminded me of it himself one minute beforehand and Danny Jones told him that 10 times in the 10 weeks leading up to it proves he's an intentional liar. He was doing an act that he didn't know that I'm the guy who said we didn't go to the moon. You really believe that? Let me understand this. I don't quite understand, which proves he's an intentionally lying. Some people thought because he did such a good job line that he might have been

hypnotized into thinking he actually walked on the moon in some mock lunar set. And while the corrupt federal government had programs where they did try to hypnotize people, It's not reliable. And so you have to have intelligent, sober people in order to tell these detailed lies. And proof of that is that he deliberately lied five times during the interview, pretending that he didn't know that I'm the guy who said we didn't go to the moon when Danny Jones told him 10 times beforehand. And he reminded me of it one minute before the interview. Yeah. And that's what's crazy about it.

He's just a liar. And that's what's really crazy about it, Bart, is because when we watched the interview, you looked at his face and it looked like, you know, he was like, you know, big eyes. Like he was totally surprised about this coming forth. And he had no idea that this was happening. Yeah. And that's what a lot of people said is like, oh, you, you kind of just brought, you know, pop this up on him. He had no idea that he was going to be confronted or even talk about this. And this was kind of the narrative that was being shaped after you guys.

interview where people were like, well, Bart Sibrell just sideswiped him and came out of nowhere with all these. I mean, first of all, tell me he knew that he was coming to debate or to talk with you, which is someone that does not believe that the moon landing happened, correct? Oh, yeah, absolutely. Yeah, and that's what so many of our listeners, you know, when they all said, hey, did this guy not know about it? What was the conversation with that?

And obviously, and I think at one point in time, you had said, you know, you knew exactly why we were going to sit down and talk. I mean, it's not like you don't know who I am. Like I said, Danny Jones had 10 telephone conversations with him in advance, prepping him with my objections to the authenticity of the moon landing. He well knew about it. And like I said, when we walked up a minute before recording started, he said, oh, I remember you, Bart, 20 years ago, you said this, this and this to me. saying that you had absolute proof we didn't go to the moon. I mean, he knew very well. The fact is, Buzz Aldrin hasn't been seen on any TV show or podcast for the last three years,

has he? Who have they brought in in his place? Charles Duke, because he's a better liar. And so right after I did the Rogan interview, suddenly Charles Duke appears on all these podcasts to put out the fire. And that was my first question to him. You know, if I walk on Mount or climbed Mount Everest, right? And got pictures of me on the top of Mount Everest, and I got an award for climbing Mount Everest. And then there's some guy who says, no, no, you filmed it with the green screen in the background.

When I fly halfway around the country and waste my time to defend the fact that I climbed Mount Everest, no, why would I bother? Yeah. You know, if the moon landings are real, why would he bother? The fact is, since the Rogan interview convinced so many people, I mean, go to the homepage of subbrell.com, S-is-S-S-S-N-S-M-B-B-A-L-Sabrell. You'll see a quote from someone who watched the Rogan interview who basically said, I thought the moon missions were real until I saw the Rogan interview, and even more so, after I read Bart's book, which I read myself in audio, Kindle-Lilloprint.

It has, I think, 17 interactive video links. I basically write a chapter, and I say go to subbrel.com, look at link one, write another chapter, go to the website, look at link two, and so forth. And he says, now I think it's completely absurd to think that the moon landings are real. That's a big podcast, the biggest in the world, transforming people's minds about basically the greatest claim of the 20th century, the greatest claim of America, the greatest claim of mankind, the greatest claim of science. People are changing their minds, 180 degrees. And so immediately after they pull Buzz Aldrin back, who's constantly making mistakes, admitting the moon landings are fake, and they bring out this guy who has the stamp of Christianity, allegedly, who claims he's

completely unaware that he was going to be talking with someone who thought the moon landings were fake when he knew that 11 times in advance, which proves he's an intentional liar. And even if we did hijack the guy, which we didn't do, he has a right to be hijacked. I mean, think about this. If he lied about the moon landing, that means he's part of a cabal that embass. that embezzled $250 billion, treated the American public, his neighbors, his friends, his church members, his pastor, and even his own wife and children, like dupes, right? And because we have talked to surviving widows and children of Apollo astronauts who they told us were murdered by the CIA for not cooperating with fraud in the Apollo president. program, he is, according to many state statutes, if I'm robbing a bank and I don't personally

kill somebody, my partner does at the right. I can be charged with that murder. So he's guilty of multiple homicides being an associate of that. If a guy is a traitor lying to schoolchildren, lying to the claim of Christianity, embezzling billions of dollars and authorizing the murder of American citizens to cover it up, the guy deserves to be hijacked. Do you understand? The guy is a traitor. They did fake the moon landing, and not only is he a traitor to the United States, he's a traitor to Christianity. I personally think about the judgment to come many times throughout the day, normally, and am I repenting enough to take hold of God's grace. And we know now the, you know, if I go buy a used car from Bubba's used car lot and it has the seal of

approval of the used car association of America, does that really mean anything? No, of course not. And just like, you know, a famous pharmaceutical company that begins with pH, if they put the, you know, the label science on it, well, what does that really mean? Yeah. Spend more money on advertising this company that makes $200 billion a year, right, a trillion dollars every five years, selling medicine to people for an illness they don't even have. Out of fear mongering, they spend more money on advertising than research and development. Yeah. Jesus says you can judge a tree by its fruit.

That's their tree. They spend more money on marketing than research to prove that their product is effective. or safe, but if they stamped science on it, then somehow you're blaspheming truth. They put the stamp of science on going to the moon. Well, go to subrel.com, and I can tell you in one minute, might as well, why the moon landings are fake. Go to the homepage, see a three-minute video that demonstrates in sunlight. Shadows always run parallel. Go out on a sunny day, your front yard, your parking lot at lunchtime at work.

Look at two trees, two telephone poles, two people on a cloudless day. Their shadows always run parallel. It's mathematically and scientifically impossible for those shadows to intersect. Look at a picture that they claim is on the moon from objects five feet apart from one another where their shadows intersect at 90 degrees from objects five feet apart, proving its electrical lighting, proving they're on Earth, meaning the moon landings are fake. In fact, the smartest AI in the world. Go to subrel.com.

We have a detailed article and video where this big AI system, not available to the public, was given permission of groups of various VIPs to play with for three days over a weekend at this convention. It's 10 AIs hooked up together. They fed it pictures of the lunar surface from the unmanned 2018. probes from China. It said the pictures are real of the lunar surface. They fed them pictures of the Apollo program. The smartest AI in the world said every single one has a fake backdrop. It can analyze the pixels and it says that changes horizontally left to right. They're all fake backdrops, meaning they're in TV studios, meaning they're on Earth. So that proves it. Then, of course,

you know, for my film, a funny thing happened on the way to the moon. We uncovered footage. of them faking part of the mission in real time right in front of your eyes using a one-foot model of the Earth pretending it's floating in space looking back at the Earth as if they're beyond Earth orbit when in fact they're still in Earth orbit with a third track of audio of the CIA telling them to fake a four-second radio delay. And then we have the logic that today, with five decades better technology, the farthest that NASA can send an astronaut into space is only 1,000th, the distance to the moon. So what they're really claiming is back in 1969, when all of NASA's computers combined had the capacity of one millionth that of a cell phone, they sent

an astronaut a thousand times farther into space than they can do today with five decades better technology. That's like saying Lindbergh flew across the Atlantic in 1927, and 55 years later, not a single airplane can fly across the Atlantic, and the best one can now only fly three miles instead of 3,000 miles back in 1927. And if that's not enough, and I know I'm ranting, we have an eyewitness, Cyrus Eugene Akers, who was the chief of security at Cannon Air Force Base, who saw them film the fake moon landing at that Air Force base, June 1st, 2nd, and 3rd of 1968. He stood beside President Johnson who gave him a list of 15 VIPs who were allowed to enter. He saved the list.

We published it in the book. He even confessed as he was dying to killing a coworker who was going to blab to the public in order to keep the moon landing fraud of secret. So they did fake the moon landing. It's a sad, sad truth. And the guy's a liar. What can I say? Yeah.

Well, and we're going to get, I got to get to a lot of what you just said in just a moment. but what I do want to ask the audience for a second, and Bart, I'm sure you've probably seen this, but two months ago, the Today Show had a piece. And you might want to ask yourself, what does Kim Kardashian and Bart Sabrell have in common? And we're about to find out this is a pretty quick clip, but Bart, listen, audience listen,

and take a guess what they might have in common. Check it out. On the latest episode of the Kardashians. Stop. To the record, do you think that we didn't walk on the moon? I don't think we did. I think it was fake. Kim Kardashian, diving deeper into her theories while speaking with actress Sarah Paulson.

Sending you, like so far, a million articles, interviews with both Buzz Aldrin and the other one. Do it. And this girl says, what was the scariest moment? And he goes, there was no scary moment because it didn't happen. It could have been scary. But it wasn't because it didn't happen. Kardashian now pushing a 50-year-old conspiracy theory and NASA is not having it. Acting administrator Sean Duffy firing out a quick response on X.

Yes, Kim Kardashian, we've been to the moon before six times. If we had actually faked the moon landing, the Soviet Union would have called us out on it. Eileen Collins was the first female space shuttle commander. Having risked their lives to do something that important and then have someone say it didn't happen, I can understand why many of them would be upset about that. That's one small step for man. By a leap for man. Buzz Aldrin, the second person to walk on the moon just after Neil Armstrong, is no stranger to being bombarded by these conspiracy theories.

In fact, in 2002, Aldrin, while outside a Beverly Hills hotel, was confronted by filmmaker Bard Sibrell, who asked him to swear on a Bible that the moon landing was real or admit it was a hoax. Aldrin's reaction, caught on camera, a punch to the face. LAPD never prosecuted Aldrin saying it was provoked. The Buzz Aldrin clip Kardashian is using as her evidence went viral a couple of years ago and was quickly debunked. It was taken out of context from a 2015 interview. Kardashian falsely saying, there's no gravity on the moon. Why is the flag blowing? It's waving because they're shaking it.

You can watch them. Scientists point to more recent satellite images capturing the remnants of the Apollo mission. To fake that requires such a high level of sophistication of computer-generated imagery and special effects. We actually weren't capable of faking that film-wise. We asked Kim Kardashian for comment, but have not yet heard back. NASA Sean Duffy, though, offering a dose of reality and inviting her to watch the next moon launch with her own eyes. For today. So there you go.

That is the today's show piece, Mr. Sebril, or he calls you Sebril. But what do you think about that, first of all? Did you see that clip on The Today Show? No, about a year ago, maybe a year and a half ago, Kim Kardashian contacted me and wanted me to be on her podcast. Unfortunately, she wanted me to pay for my airfare and hotel accommodations while she's a millionaire, and I'm living off of my retirement, Social Security, which is pretty low.

So I said, I'm sorry, I can't lose money doing your show, which I was surprised. Well, another thing we have in common is we're both pre-propers, except I wouldn't buy pre-pop popcorn, taking up all that volume. I would buy the popcorn seeds. Maybe she can learn from that little feedback. But in regard to the Today Show program, it's interesting they call the truth, the conspiracy theory. And what they present as arguments for why the moon landings must be real. are actually the exact opposite of the truth, that I'll tell you why.

One woman said it would be more difficult to fake it than to actually do it. That's the exact opposite of the truth. Here's the proof. 10, 20 years ago, they produced a film called The Martian. Did they fly to Mars and shoot on location? Or did they go to an Italy studio? Yeah. Well, I think they shot in a TV studio because it's easier.

the amount of sophistication that they didn't have wasn't to fake it. The amount of sophistication that they didn't have was to do it without killing the crew. I mean, go to subral.com. We have NASA's own engineer saying that technology necessary to go to the moon and back and survive has not been invented yet. He says it out of his own mouth. Yeah. I don't know what more you can say. And to me, if I walked on the moon and someone thought otherwise, it wouldn't make me mad.

I would just laugh. I would find that hysterically funny. I'm like, really? You really think it was done in a TV studio? Oh, my gosh. You want me to swear on a Bible? Sure. Would two Bibles make you feel better?

Or what about three? But the fact is, it was like I walked up to him in front of his wife and said, oh, your mistress says hello. He got mad because it's the truth. A sword with no point causes no injury. And they lied. I spoke with the prosecutor, the district attorney of Beverly Hills, and they did not say what they quoted on the news. The news is not reporting the facts.

They're not even investigating it because I spoke with the prosecutor. And I said, look, you got this guy committing assault on camera. Why are you going to prosecute him? They didn't say because he was provoked. Because it sticks and stones will break my bones and names will never hurt me, right? that's the standard, right? And we're taught that from kindergarten school, and it's supposed to apply to us as adults. They said the reason they didn't prosecute him is because he's a national hero.

So you have a two-tier, you have a two-tier justice system. If you're a national hero, you're untouchable. You can commit murder. You can punch people in public and get away with that. They weren't going to prosecute a national hero. But he's not a hero. He's a traitor. And the fact is, if Charles Duke really walked on the moon, there would be no need for him to fly halfway across the country and to confront somebody who thought otherwise.

It would be a waste of his time. He did it because he's putting out fires. I remember I did the Danny Jones interview in March of last year, and he brought up this video of some debunking video. I've never seen a single debunking video. went from worshipping the moon landings, being a Gaga fanboy, to realizing they did fake it and being the outspoken critic thereof. That's a transformation because of the truth. So he shows me this debunking video. I noticed the time code in the lower right-hand corner. This is after I did the Rogan interview. It's two and a half hours long. Now, if the moon landings are real,

then the amount of evidence that I have to the contrary is zero. So how long should a debunking video be? Zero minutes. It's two and a half hours long to beat down into the ground, if they can, the emerging facts that prove they did fake the moon landing. And the idea that Russia or China would blurt it out is simply not true. You have to, that's just an assumption. If I had a picture of a world leader with the prostitute, I could upload it to the internet and bring that person's career to an end, and then I can't even get a dollar for that picture

anymore. Or I could blackmail them year after year after year. And that's exactly what's going on. I know someone who works in the command center of the Chinese space agency, and they said everybody there knows the moon missions are fake. They're blackmailing NASA for space technology and exchange. We're not blowing the whistle about the Apollo program. Again, the smartest AI just said the pictures are fake.

And guess who was there witnessing the AI results? Vladimir Putin. It never made any story, any news story, not even RT, because the Soviets are blackmailing us as well. And he didn't look surprised at all. He looked like, oh, the end of the blackmail may be coming. He won't be able to use that anymore. The fact is you cannot have a thousand times greater space traveling technology. They've postponed returning to the moon in five years, ten times.

NASA has never kept a schedule and their entire history, not a single time, except the most complicated mission of all time. There hasn't been an aerospace machine that has ever flown on the first occasion. With 10 years newer technology than the Apollo broke, the 747 aircraft took 168 attempts to get off the ground. Even the Wright brothers, motorized kite did not work on the first occasion. Yeah. It happened in the history of aviation that a new. Airplane, spacecraft rocket rolled out and worked on the first occasion.

Never happened a single time except the most complicated one of all time. Another thing that's never happened, a technology breakthrough, like splitting the atom, like breaking the sound barrier, like flying across the Atlantic, that no one on Earth could repeat it 50 years later, it's never happened. 10 years after the first atomic bomb, atomic bombs were 1,000 times more powerful. So if they could go to the moon on the first attempt with one million to computing and power cell phone, we would have been on Mars 10 years later. We'd be in another solar system by now, and there'd be bases all over the moon.

It's also never happened in the history of the world that a breakthrough technology was intentionally destroyed after it became successful. Go to subbrel.com. You'll see a clip of NASA's own personnel saying they intentionally destroyed all of the moon landing technology. Now, maybe if you were ever going to destroy a technology, you might destroy the atomic bomb. But like I said, just 10 years later, they're thousand times more powerful. They not only destroyed all the schematics, all the blueprints of the lunar lander and the rocket, they destroyed all the original telemetry tapes where the rocket really was and all of the original videotapes right before they were going to be transferred to HD TV.

And Barr, I got to ask you a question here because getting back on the Soviet Union would have called it out, right? I got a couple things here and then we're going to go back to if the launches are real at all. Number one, you know, if you kind of look up what AI says, you know, they believe launches were real, Saturn V launches and rockets were almost impossible to fake. But where it gets murkier, as far as would the Soviet Union have the capability of calling out a fake moon landing or whatever, even a launch? They could not see the astronauts walking on a moon, obviously.

I mean, no nation had real-time visual confirmation of surface activity. Telemetry could be simulated or selectively transmitted, so they received signals, but not raw internal NASA data. They had no physical access to Apollo hardware sites. Everything came through U.S. controlled channels or long-distance tracking. radio communication existed signals were received from space but you know that also could have been simulated as AI says here now the question is for me is first of all I don't necessarily believe that the United States couldn't pull off some simulated moon rocket launch like an Apollo mission and not at least it be visible to Russia that we launched a rocket but beyond that

Russia would have had no way to know whether or not we went to them moon where our rocket was. They likely could not have also intercepted our communications. That also could have been simulated according to AI. But do you think that we actually launched the rocket, right? I mean, can you get there to where we launched it? Maybe there were astronauts in the rocket. They just didn't go to the moon. Well, yeah, we have footage at subrel.com of the crew of Apollo 11. It's time stamped by a computer two days into the flight where they're supposed to be halfway to the moon. And what we're seeing is like a black screen with a little blue ball earth in the center to allegedly demonstrate that we're halfway to the moon looking back at the earth.

They claim they're halfway to the moon. They claim the way they're getting the shot is by putting the camera's lens up against the window. The fact is we have the unedited version that says, do not show to the public at the beginning of the real. The lights come up. The camera's really at the back of the spacecraft that had all the lights turned off and several feet in front of the camera is a circular window outside of which it's completely filled with the Earth and the Earth orbit. But with the lights off, it looks like the Earth floating in space. Even my critics agree that is them faking being halfway to the moon. Now, if you could really go halfway to the moon, you wouldn't need to fake it.

So it's proof they can't leave Earth orbit. That's what convinced me they did indeed. fake the moon landing. It also convinced two NBC news directors who flew me to New York, put me up in the Waldorf store, and paid me thousands of dollars licensing fees for the exclusive rights to broadcast nationwide proof that they didn't go to the moon, which coincidentally was never mentioned in the room. And both NBC news directors agreed, it proved that the moon missions were fake. And right before it's to be broadcast, they got a threatening call from the federal government. threatening to unplug them or, you know, revoke their FCC license.

The fact is they did fake the moon landing. We have proof of it. We have video proof. We have photographic proof. We have an eyewitness testimony. And we have the logic that you can't have greater technology in the past than in the future. And also, let's go to the AI. The AI that said the moon landings were fake is not available to the public.

And it's 10 AIs hooked up together. It's showing off. It's like this car. You go to a car convention. They've got cars there that will get 150 miles to the gallon. Are they available to the public? No. So they let these teams of VIPs play with the smartest AI. One had it write a symphony, took two seconds. One had it write a novel, took two seconds. And one had it take advantage of the deep fake detective program that has never been wrong. It said the pictures from the Chinese probes unmanned, which can survive. the radiation. On the lunar surface, their genuine pictures, the foreground and the background gradually proved that it's the same landscape. But every single Apollo picture, it scanned, said they had a fake backdrop that the soil suddenly changed the direction of the pixels, and it had a fake projected backdrop.

Now, if you're asking an AI available to the public, naturally it's going to say the moon landings are real. asking AI, available to the public, who the 16th president was. I assure you it's going to say Abraham Lincoln. Well, how does it know that? Was the AI there in 1860 at polling stations calculating the data to prove that Abraham Lincoln was the 16th president? No, it was programmed to say Abraham Lincoln was a 16th president, and it's just regurgitating and parroting that information. We know that Google was founded by DARPA, which is a defense program of technological advancement, and they use it to control public opinion. That's why Wikipedia says the moon landings are real.

They publicly available AIs say the moon landings are real. They're regurgitating what they were programmed to say. It doesn't mean that they're real any more than the AI can prove that Abraham Lincoln was the 16th president. It's just regurgitating that program. Now, the other AI, though, is not available to the public. It's 10 times more advanced than the AI is available to the public. It was shown photos in comparison. Here's a photograph of the lunar surface, as claimed by China in 2018 from an unmanned probe. Is it real? The computer said it was. Then it showed him Apollo pictures. Every single Apollo picture from every single mission. It said had a fake backdrop, which means it's in a TV studio, which means it's on Earth, which means they didn't

go to the moon. And how sad it is that the poster child of conspiracy theories, they fake the moon landing, ends up being true. And I assure you it is. If I can go from worshiping the moon landings, greatest fanboy, to the greatest critic, only the truth could cause that conversion. There's more than enough proof at subrel.com. My book goes into the deathbed testimony of of the eyewitness who saw them film it at Cannon Air Force Base, as well as my interview with the widow and son of the man who was going to be the first man to walk on the moon, who was murdered by the CIA because he wouldn't participate with the fraud. That's what his widow told me.

That's not even my opinion. That's her opinion. That's in the book as well. They did fake the moon landing. They're trying to put out those fires. They're coming up with all sorts of excuses why the moon landings must be real, contrary to all this evidence that proves otherwise. They're still fake whether people accept it or not. Yeah.

And by the way, you know, AI is not, you know, it's not as locked up as you think. Because if you ask AI, you know, if you were to argue for the fake moon landing, what would your argument be? And what AI says here is that, number one, these were among the most histories. historically important recordings in human history, but yet they were destroyed. NASA reused the tape, citing cost and storage limitations. I would argue this removes the best primary evidence that could settle debates permanently. If the landings were unquestionably real, why lose the raw original proof instead of preservant like the Dead Sea Scrolls in modern science? And then obviously the Van Allen Radiation Belt.

Apollo spacecraft had minimal shielding. Radiation Dossometers were crewed by modern standards. Skeptics argued that the exposure should have been lethal or at least caused acute illness. And yes, this is true, it says. NASA's response exists, but radiation exposure data relies almost entirely on NASA's on measurements. No independent verification of astronaut DOSimeter readings exist. Also, shadows appear non-parallel. This is the photographic and lighting anomalies.

Objects in shadow are still visible. Some highlights appear. you like. And so these resemble multi-light film sets. Film technology of the 1960s should not have performed as well as shown under extreme contrast. Also, no stars and moon photos with no atmosphere. Stars should have been visible. The explanation of camera exposure feels convenient. Skeptics argue that stars could have been added but were admitted to avoid mistakes. And then also in possibly advanced technology for the era, guidance computers had less power than a modern calculator.

And there's no modern computer simulations existed. The lunar module has never been recreated or surpassed. And even also the astronaut behavior and body language. And so this is awkward pauses during press conferences, defensive or evasive responses, emotional discomfort when questioned later in life, or also maybe punching people. I don't know if anybody that we know knows anything about that. Technology should have advanced, not regressed. if it were routine, it would have been done again.

And the we lost the technology explanation feels implausible at the very least. And so AI will answer these things and be like, this is why it's probably bullshit. Yeah, you just have to ask it the right way. You got to ask it the right way. And I think AI even believes this bullshit. But my question too is, Bart, is, you know, even like how when the today piece said that, well, you know, they took the clip out of context about how. you know, Buzz Audrin told this little schoolgirl that we didn't do it, even though that's not the only clip.

He's done it. I want to play this real quick. And because the Today Show said, well, they took it out context. It's not what it sounded like. This is the actual clip. It's very short. But, yeah, it's interesting. If I may say beforehand, they didn't actually show the clip, did they?

No. They talked about the clip, but they didn't show it. The number one proof that they fake the moon landing is not the flag blowing in the air can Although proof is what they refused to broadcast at NBC, New York City, when they flew me there to broadcast it nationwide. That they didn't show. That they didn't talk about. That's what convinced me it was fake. That's what convinced to NBC news directors it was fake.

So they're manipulating the information. In fact, after the Russian, former Russian space director, he was not allowed to say publicly because they're blackmailing the United States. but as retired. Three days into his retirement, Dmitri Rotogen said the Apollo missions were fake. This is about four years ago. The very next day, Fox News calls me up and says,

we're going to do an... We haven't read your book. We haven't seen any of your evidence. And even if your evidence proves the moon landings are fake, we will conclude that they are real. Okay, by the way, Bart, you broke up for a second there. He said Fox News called you and said it. So Fox News calls me up the day after the former Russian space director.

They're like the NASA equivalent. The director of Russia's NASA, the three days after he resigned, he said the moon missions are fake because they're blackmailing, you know, the United States. He couldn't say it while he was in office. The day after that, Fox News calls me up because it made the Internet news. former Russian space director says the moon missions are fake. They got to put out that fire. That's why Charles Duke was there on the Danny Jones podcast to put out the Rogan interview fire. So the next day, Fox News allegedly anti-corruption, right, big allegedly on that one. They say we're going to do an hour-long special about whether they went to the moon or not.

And then they confide in me. We haven't seen any of your proof. We haven't read your book. We haven't seen your film. And even if it proves the moon landings are fake, we will conclude that they were real. They tell me that in advance. And then get this. I watched the hour long special. And they find a quote from a Russian scientist, which could be, you know, anybody at high school level. And 1969, one Russian scientist who said in 1969, congratulations.

and therefore, Fox News said, even the Russians believe we went to the moon. They didn't mention that six weeks earlier, the former Russian space director said the moon missions are fake. You understand? They deliberately did not mention that information. Do you understand? They said before the investigation starts, we will conclude the moon missions are real, to reassure people. You understand? So what you're playing, this Today Show, they said Kardashian's clip was taken out of context,

but they never let the public listen to it themselves. And they talk about the flag blowing in the wind, but they never show the real proof of them faking being halfway to the moon with a one-foot model with a track of the CIA telling them to fake a four-second radio delay to pretend they're beyond Earth orbit. They never show that one. Yeah. Yeah, and I believe we played that on the last episode that we had you on. Yeah, we did.

Yeah, and we'll get to that in a second. Let's play this quick clip. This is the clip that Buzz Aldrin's talking to this school kid, and this is what was supposedly taken on the context. Listen. What do you've been to the meeting in such a long time? That's not an eight-year-old's question. That's my question. I want to know, but I think I know.

because we didn't go there and that's the way it happened. And if it didn't happen, it's nice to know why it didn't happen. So in the future, if we want to keep doing something, we need to know why something stopped in the past that we wanted to keep it going. So there's basically the clip of Buzz Aldrin saying it didn't happen. And then there's another clip, too. I think this is it. Listen to this as well. We watched you guys land on the moon.

And this is another clip. I believe he's on Conan O'Brien here. Check it out. Yeah, well, let's, if we can talk about the first clip first. Yeah, go ahead. He was asked, why haven't you been back? And he said, because we didn't, did not go. And if we didn't did not go, it's important to know why.

They don't have enough fuel to leave her with orbit. Von Braun said, camera and then print, the largest rocket they can build can only achieve Earth orbit. Elon Musk said, with a rocket three stories taller than the Apollo rocket that can carry twice as much fuel, it's going to take 15 launches of fuel to a space station first before you have enough fuel to land on the moon and fly back up from the moon back to Earth. That means it's going to take 30 times the fuel as the Apollo rocket to repeat the event when fuel efficiency should become, you know, greater over time, right?

Yeah. So that's a big contradiction as well. Well, and, you know, and two, this Artemis mission coming up, and I'm going to play this clip. Well, let me go ahead and play this clip first. This is another time that Buzz Aldrin just said something weird. And I think that's why old Charles Duke's going out and talking now, even though he's, I don't know, I don't know how, what the age difference is here. But it seems like Buzz is just saying shit that he probably shouldn't be saying.

And here is a clip of that. Listen. What was the scariest moment of the journey? Scariest. It didn't happen. It could have been scary. He went down and we watched you guys land on the moon, which was, no, you didn't. What?

Because there wasn't any television. There wasn't anybody taking it. picture. You watched animation. See, you associated what you saw with... I have very hazy memories. Well, no, what we saw was we all gathered around the old top radio and listening.

Talking about, you know, how many feet we were going to the left and right, and then I said, contact light, engine stop. It's exciting. And then Neil said, Houston, Tranquility Base. The Eagle has landed. How about that? That was very exciting. Not a bad line.

Yeah. So there you go. I mean, that's Buzz Aldrin. Once in a press conference, or not a press conference, once in this kind of panel hearing, he literally is asked and he says, well, we didn't, we didn't go. I don't know what you all are talking about. Yeah, it seems to me he wants to tell the truth, but he can't. It seems. It seems.

And I think even like when he punched you, you know, it could have been from frustration of the fact that, like, you know, I'm having to live this line. Yeah. And somebody's tying his hands behind his back where he cannot tell the truth. Yeah. I mean, does it, I mean, does it seem like. I mean, Bart, to you, does it seem like he wants the truth out? Because, I mean, how do you make that many mistakes?

It's almost like he's blatantly saying it to your face in public. But yet, you know, the narrative lives on. Well, it lives on for the moment. I know somebody who met him at a Hollywood party. I think it was Joan Rivers House, New Year's party or something like that. And he was super intoxicated. And you probably know or know of people that. that alcohol is pretty close to true serum.

Yes. And he admitted in a highly intoxicated state that they did not go to the moon. Then we made it all up. See now this is an audio podcast. I thought of another clip you could play. If you go to my website, subrel.com, that's S-S-S-S-Sam. I-B-As-M-Boy, R-E-L, Sebrell.com. Go to the homepage and click on a funny thing happened on the way to the moon

and queue it up to 34 minutes and 20 seconds. And while you're doing that, I'll describe what we're about to hear. Again, that's 34 minutes, 20 seconds of a funny thing happened on the way to the moon, homepage, subbril.com. Basically, this footage, which we're describing, we can play part of it because there's a significant audio clip on it as well. This is where the crew of Apollo 11 was using a one-foot model of the earth to pretend they were looking back at the earth from outer space. The lights come up, and you can see they've made

a mock one-foot model of the earth, and they're faking being halfway to the moon. My critics agree. It's them faking being halfway to the moon. To NBC news directors agree, it's them faking being halfway to the moon. The tape, when you pop it in, says, do not show to the public. It's unedited, special effect footage that a whistleblower at NASA sent me. The first thing you hear is, is NASA saying, hey, Goldstone, a tracking station, tells us the TV picture looks great. The image is not even going to NASA. Then there's one second of dead air, two seconds of dead air, three seconds of dead air, four seconds of dead air.

Then you hear a third party that's not NASA and not the astronauts. It doesn't have that radio EQ sound. a third party where the microphone is says talk. And then Neil Armstrong speaks. The fact is they never left Earth orbit. We have them faking, being halfway to the moon from Earth orbit, with the Earth filling the entire window outside of the spacecraft. So if they were talking to NASA, it would be a virtual instantaneous conversation. Hello, how are you?

I'm fine. How's your day? Well, not too bad. How's your day? Well, pretty good. supposed to be halfway to the moon. Yeah, and here's that clip, by the way. At light speed, yeah, I'll tell you when you hit play in a second.

So at light speed, they're supposed to go two seconds out and two seconds back or four seconds. So what you're going to hear is NASA say the TV picture looks great. You're going to hear four seconds of dead air of fake radio delay. Then you're going to hear the CIA tell Neil Armstrong in his earpiece, talk. He was told not to speak until prompted to create a four-second radio delay. Go ahead and play that clip if you want. All right, here we go. And there you heard it.

The illusion we are attempting to create is the earth at a distance to demonstrate their far journey from it. And their ability to it back up if you want. Yeah. So, yeah. So, yeah, let's just listen to it one more time. Again, you're going to hear like a radio type of EQ, like a sound through a walkie-talkie of NASA. you're going to hear four seconds of dead air to pretend they're halfway to the moon for the radio signal to go there and come back when, in fact, it was instantaneous. Then you're going to hear a third audio with a very clear EQ because he's where the command center is at the CIA.

He's talking into a microphone. He's going to say talk after the fake four second radio delay to prompt Neil Armstrong to speak. The alarm's strong in an earpiece. He was told not to answer right away. give away the fact that you're close to the Earth. So they're faking a four-second radio delay. You'll hear NASA. You're here four seconds. You'll hear the CIA say talk. And then he'll speak. Go ahead and play that one more time. All right. Here we go. There you go. They're being prompted with a four-second radio delay.

And that was at the beginning of the reel of them using a one-foot model to fake being halfway to the moon. So they're faking, being halfway to the moon visually. The lights come up, and you see it's a one-foot model of the Earth, not really the Earth floating in space. And we have audio proof. They're faking being halfway to the moon by their mock creation of a four-second radio delay. That's what convinced me, and that's what the Today Show and all these stations refused to broadcast. I did a show, the one show, that broadcast that footage, it was on tech TV, It was some David Letterman-type show.

The show was so popular. For the first three years of this talk show's existence, the ratings doubled every 30 days nonstop for 36 months. It was by far the most popular program on the entire tech TV program. And then they have me on as a guest, and they show that footage and the very next day they're canceled. The number one show. Wow.

Now, why did Fox News, right? Remember Fox News called me up the day after the former Russian space director said the moon missions are fake to put out that fire. They said, even if you have proof, they faked it, we will say the moon missions are real. So why would they fire Tucker Carlson, right? when he gets 100 million views for every broadcast, the number one show on Fox, if they're interested in business, which is what they claim, they would never cancel his program, but they're interested in information control. The same on tech TV, the number one show that doubled the ratings every 30 days for 36 months in a row, broadcast that footage, they were canceled the next day. Yeah. And speaking of Fox News, I mean, I think the reason why Tucker was canceled is because,

You know, he was calling out election fraud pretty heavily. I know that, you know, during Dominion voting, you know, they sued Fox News. But either way, I've come to learn that no matter who you vote for, it doesn't matter if it's Trump, or you're a Trump supporter or your whoever, Democrat side, you know, I think the media is controlled on a mass level. And it doesn't matter who's in office. I think all media mostly is controlled. I think they have to control it if they want to keep the narrative of everything that they, you know, and they always claim national security and all this.

And one day, if we ever actually do find out for sure, if the government or media or whoever comes out and says, hey, well, the moon land was fake, they're going to say, well, it was national security. You know, we were in a space race. We had to convince Russia or whatever that we had this technology and capabilities. Let me ask you before we get into Artemis, because I want to talk about Artemis before we go as well, why do you think that we did fake the moon landing? and why do you think that we didn't go to the moon?

I mean, besides all the obvious things, but like, why did we fake it? Well, like, what was the main purpose of the United States faking this mission? And what do you think was the biggest, what is your biggest theory on why we couldn't or could not get to the moon then or even now? My theory is Van Allen Belt. Okay, go ahead, Bart. Yeah, let me answer that part first. We have them faking being halfway to the moon.

moon. Okay. So that means they cannot go halfway to the moon. They cannot leave Earth orbit. And here we are 55 years later and no one has ever left Earth orbit. You see that? So that has something to do with the limit. Then Elon Musk said, in order to have enough fuel to go to the moon, it's going to take 15 fuel trips carrying twice as much fuel as a single Apollo rocket, meaning in order to go to the moon today, in order to land and come back, you have to have at least 30 times the fuel than was claimed in the Apollo rocket. We have von Braun saying that on camera at a clip at Sabrelle.com. We have him saying it in writing in my book, Moon Man.

which you can get an audio that I read, Kindlea Print, at subrel.com. So they couldn't leave Earth orbit because they didn't have enough fuel, and this is one of the reasons they destroyed the schematics, the blueprints of everything. There's another reason. One of the clips at subrel.com is talking about the radiation belt that surrounds the earth that most people don't know even exists. About 1,000 miles above the earth and extending 30,000 miles beyond that is a field of radiation called the Van Allen Radiation Belt.

Every manned space mission has been well below that. The space station is only 250 miles above the Earth. So pick a city 250 miles from you, make it vertical, and that's as high as anyone has ever gone except to the moon. They'd have to go through the radiation. One of the clips at subrel.com is a NASA engineer saying, it's a dangerous radiation, and we must solve these radiation challenges.

before we send people through this region of space. I'm quoting them word for word and talking about the radiation belt. We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space. So that means two things. The challenges have not been solved to survive going through it. And it's a requirement before you can go to the moon and survive. Well, that means the Apollo missions were fake. because if they must solve these challenges before we send people through that region of space,

it means their radiation challenges have not been solved and are mandatory to be solved before you can go through it, which means they didn't go to the moon. And we have Apollo 11 in Earth orbit two days into the flight, and all the equipment was the same on the Apollo program. So if Apollo 11's equipment can't leave Earth orbit, none of it did. We have a picture from the alleged last mission to the moon where the shadow, is intersecting at 90 degrees from objects five feet apart when they should be parallel, proving they never went with any of the Apollo program.

They were just milking money, $250 billion to spend on Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and places that Congress didn't approve. So that's a number of reasons why they cannot go to the moon. Elon Musk said so. In fact, to land a rocket vertically, remember they allegedly landed a rocket vertically on the moon six times, right? Elon Musk, 50 years later, his rocket to land vertically had six rockets all around the side, plus the main engine in order to gimbal it properly in order to land vertically. That rocket had 600 million times more computing power than the lunar lander. The first time it tried to land vertically,

it blew up. The second time, it blew up. The third time, it blew up. The third time, it blew up. fourth time it blew up. It took five attempts with 600 million times more competing power to land a rocket vertically. So how did they do it six times in a row flawlessly with one 600 million to competing power? He has said the Apollo missions are historical and technological anomaly out of place. You cannot have greater technology in the past. It's never happened. And then why they did it, okay. Kennedy set the goal. We're going to go to the moon by the end of the decade after the U.S. went into space for 15 minutes without even orbiting the earth. They just went from Florida to California. And that's it. He's a visionary. He's not a scientist. And he said by making the boast that gives us more motivation to do it. They found out they couldn't go to the moon. So they bluffed like in poker. Now there were benefits from it. it. They were embezzling the money. They were saving face. Otherwise, they would have to eat humble pie, right? What did Jesus say? To start a tower and to not finish it makes you a fool before the

world. And they didn't want to look like a fool. It was pride why they fake the moon landing. They can embezzle the money. They only needed about 20% of the $250 billion to orbit the earth. So they got to keep 80% of that, right, or $200 billion. And then they had this pep rally during the Vietnam War because Richard Nixon said the number one threat to the nation at the time isn't Russia, isn't China, it's American citizens protesting the federal government. So you give them a guaranteed successful moon landing because it's already been filmed and in the can. And then you give them a pep rally something to cheer. about to, you know, take away the protests from the Vietnam more. But the real reason, Sherry, that they did it, even though those are a bunch of reasons. The core reason is the same reason

that Clinton, President Clinton gave when he had the affair, which may I remind you, he denied 20 times. The Moonlandings are real. The Moonlandings are real. The Moonlandings are real. I didn't have sex with her. I didn't have sex with her. I did not touch that woman. I did not touch her. And after 20 denials, he reversed and said, okay, I did. And by the way, in his book on page 156, he says he doubts the authenticity of the moon landings, by the way. And so he was asked, why did you do it? And he said, because I could. Because I could get away with it.

mind you, the federal government, according to Bobby Kennedy Jr., who has more access to the JFK files than Oliver Stone does, according to him, he says with 100% certainty, the CIA killed President Kennedy because he was going to shut down their agency. Now, that's election interference. And then he put an end to the Vietnam War. Johnson immediately rescinded that order. and his defense secretary, Robert McNamara, said, look, there's no public support for going to war with Vietnam. We need something like Pearl Harbor because the day before Pearl Harbor, 90% of Americans were against entering World War II. And the very next day, 90% wanted to get even. You see?

He says, we need something like that. So on his deathbed, he said that him and the CIA got together and they completely fabricated a North Vietnamese ship attacking an American ship in the Gulf of Tonkin. They said it just never happened. Congress passed a law to start a war called the Gulf of Tonkin resolution based on an event that the CIA fabricated. So if you think are represented by Congress, no, they're represented by the CIA. You understand? Because they're passing laws, not on what we want, but on lies from the CIA. So if they're willing to kill their own president and kill 58,220 of their own soldiers in the Vietnam War that they completely fabricated the beginning of,

I don't think they're going to have a problem faking a video image on the moon. It's just that it's a positive lie. Whoever killed Kennedy, it's a tragedy. Whoever did 9-11, it's a tragedy. This is different. This is telling people what they want to hear. giving candy to a crying child and then trying to take it away. Your team won the Super Bowl.

Your country put men on the moon. Your science put men on the moon. Your technology, your pride, your ingenuity, your intelligence put men on the moon. How dare you say it's not true, right? But it's a false God. It is a false God. They did fake the moon landing. And when you realize that, the faking of the moon landing,

moon landing is so much more profound historically than if they had actually gone. I mean, either they planted a flag came back on the first attempt with one million at the computing power of cell phone, even though no nation on Earth could repeat it 55 years later, or the most powerful nation on Earth falsified mankind's greatest accomplishment, which was financed by their own citizens to deceive them, and their taxes also paid the CIA agents who murdered people who wouldn't cooperate with the fraud, if that's true, and I assure you it is, that's so much more significant than if they had actually gone. So one of the greatest events in human history is the faking of the moon landing by the most powerful nation that claims to be the one with the most

integrity, that deceives their own people, murders their own people to cover it up. And they don't have the maturity to admit that they set a goal that they couldn't achieve. And it's relevant because these people are at large. We can't have one child disappear every month in our subdivision and have it be going on for 55 years and say, well, is this one of those things? No, if the truth makes us free, then lies make us slaves. We are slaves in America all the while being told that we're free, which is the best way to have slaves. we're told, get this, I'm going to tell you there's a country in the world. It's, you know, one of those backwards countries where people don't wear shoes and they have

dirt floors where 70% of the population is sick all the time. I mean, can you imagine? 70% of the population is sick 100% of the time. You would say they have the worst health care in the world, right? That's actually the United States of America. Yeah, that's what I was going to say. 70% of the population is taking prescription medicine, which means 70% of the population is sick all the time. And according to even NBC news, if you remove heart disease and cancer, the number one cause of death is medical malpractice, which kills, I think, 5 million people every 10 years.

Wow. plus 70% of the population is sick all the time because of the bad food, bad air, bad water, whatever. And wouldn't you say it's because we're overweight? So we're being told the exact opposite of the truth. We're told we have the best health care in the world when we obviously, statistically, have the worst health care in the world. We're three when we live in a police state. You have, you know, I don't know, three break lights. One of them goes out.

you're pulled over by the cops and God forbid one of your friends is black and you get the third degree for an hour and a half, you know, right here or whatever. You know, that's the police state that we live in. And these gangsters are at large. It's not like they fake the moon landing and no one got killed. That might, I might even admire their cleverness. But our constitution on the Declaration of Independence, which says when any nation, becomes destructive of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

It is the right of the people to alter or abolish it. The first one is life. Betty Grissom says her husband, who was going to be the first man to walk on the moon, was murdered by the CIA. He told her so. The day before he died, he called her up, and I interviewed her for four hours, and she told me, he said, hon, for some strange reason, The CIA is all over the launch pad at NASA today.

Never seen him here before in three years. Why did they show up today to inspect the equipment? The very next day, he's dead from faulty equipment because a few weeks earlier, he took reporters up to the top of the rocket without permission, put a big lemon on top and called the moon rocket a lemon by the man who was to be the first man to walk on the moon because he said they were 10 years away from going to the moon. not two. They couldn't get a wired intercom to work between two buildings. The stick, the pole, with a bag on the end of it to pick up the first lunar sample when Neil Armstrong was attempting

to do that six weeks before we're going to the moon, the bag broke off the end of the pole. They can't get that to work, not to mention radiation protection, fuel, you know, a thousand other things that if just one went wrong, it would cause a catastrophic failure. So that's why they fake the moon landing because they got away with Kennedy. They got away with the Gulf of Tonkin, and it emboldened them. And they continue to be emboldened. Unless these people are caught and the moon landing fraud comes out, it's the end of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in America.

They're in charge. The number one tool to bring down the corruption in Washington, D.C., is to show the public they were taken for suckers six times about the moon landing fraud. Show them that. And that's why they're afraid because it wasn't that they just fake the moon landing. The very next thing they're going to have to investigate if the fraud comes out is the murder of Apollo astronauts, who their family members have been saying for 55 years they were murdered. It's going to come out that the government killed their own people to cover up their crimes.

Yeah, and we've talked about that. That's why they ridicule people who know the moon missions are fake. And we've talked about that on a lot of podcasts just with, you know, our own government, killing our own citizens over stuff like this. But I did write my question now because I didn't want to forget it because I know there's a lot of people like me that want to know this answer. And this is more of a scientific question. When you're talking about Elon Musk and talking about, you know, his spacecraft and how it can land vertically

and it takes all this, you know, the gas or whatever. Fuel or whatever. Why would it take fuel if you're on the moon if there's no gravity? No, there is gravity on the moon. It's just approximately one sixth of that on Earth. There's no atmosphere. So in order to land on the moon, I guess to leave Earth orbit, you'd have to be going at least 17,000 miles an hour, probably.

You'd have to start at that and accelerate. And so you're going somewhere between 17,000. and 25,000 miles an hour on a trip to the moon. If you go any slower, you're probably going to run out of food and air before you do that. And so you have to slow down. You have to slow down to zero miles per hour from as fast as 25,000 miles an hour. And that would take a lot of fuel and a lot of computing power. Do you understand?

To gimbled a rocket, to prevent the thing from falling over, it's so delicate. People don't realize this, this space shuttle. It's never landed manually. It's done by computers. They have four backup computers in addition to the main computer because without those computers, it will crash every time. And it's aerodynamic. It's working in air. It's a glider.

And still, the slightest deviation outside of a perimeter, it will crash. So the same and more so with landing a rocket vertically, which is much more difficult and add to that, atmosphere to help you slow it down, that's going to take a tremendous amount of computing power, which the lunar module just didn't have. That's why they destroy the technology. I mean, they admit that the lunar modules, walls, were only as thick as two pieces of aluminum foil. Now, would anyone in their right mind get in a spacecraft where it was only the thickness of two pieces of aluminum foil that my elbow, my nose, my finger, my ink pen, my toe, my poke a hole in and cause the entire thing to collapse. Would you even get in a spacecraft like that? I don't think so.

And of course, they never left Earth orbit, so they didn't have to worry about that problem, but this is why they destroyed the technology, because you could prove it didn't have enough fuel to land or go back up. They're claiming they went from zero moss power on the moon, and docked with a spacecraft going about 3,000 miles an hour. If they were more than one tenth of a second off, they would have been killed drifting off into outer space. How did they have the computing power to do that? They can't even do that today, right?

I mean, why is it in 2014, NASA said they're going to have people orbiting the moon in 2018. Okay. So if they orbit the moon this year, that's eight years behind schedule. Okay, the entire moon program was eight years after Kennedy's goal. He said let's go to the moon before the end of the decade, which was eight years later. So how could they, with untried 1960s technology before cell phones, microwave ovens, when every computer combined had one million that of a cell phone, how come they can go from from never being in space to walking on the moon in eight years.

And now they're eight years behind schedule just to orbit the moon with five decades better technology. Right? I mean, and then they said they were going to orbit originally in 2018. Do you understand that? That's what they originally said. And then it wasn't until 2022. And they only had mannequins orbiting the moon. So you can drive cars and play golf on the moon with 1960s technology.

And the best you can do 55 years later is have mannequins orbit the moon. But wait, Bart, did Bart? Did they ever launch a dog into space? Is that true? Have you seen that? I think the Soviets launched their first animal, I believe, was a German shepherd. They launched into space. The Soviets did everything first.

They launched the first satellite, the first animal, the first man, the first woman, the first spacewalk, the first crew of three, the first of two spacecraft simultaneously. For every 10 hours we spent in space, they spent 50 hours. And nobody on Earth has able to – that's like saying Limburg – like I said, Limburg flew across the Atlantic in 1927, 3,000 miles. And 55 years later, not a single nation on the world. Earth can fly an airplane over the Atlantic, and the best plane, 55 years later, can only fly three miles, one thousandths to distance. This has never happened in the history of the world. How soon after Lindbergh flew across the Atlantic, did someone fly across the Atlantic?

It was later that year. How soon after the sound barrier was broken did the other nation break the sound barrier later that year? How soon after the atomic bomb, the atom was split, did Russia split the atom two years later? You see? So this is a preposterous claim that has the emotional wraparound of a positive lie that people don't want to give up. I talked to a college professor teaching aerospace at one of America's leading universities. And he said, even if Neil Armstrong confessed on national TV that the moon missions were fake, he would still think they walked on the moon anyway. Yeah. And by the way, we do have a question.

That is irrational by people who claim to be scientists who are subject to being irrational. They have emotions. They have pride. And they're clouding this up because it's a positive lie. If we don't acknowledge this cancer that we have, then the whole body will die. If anyone in the government wants to end corruption, their number one is to show America they were taken for succors six times about the moon landing fraud. and then you'll have Republicans and Democrats insisting on a house cleaning. And that's what they're afraid of.

And we did have quite a few questions, but I did want to get to one in particular. When old Charles was on the show, he says that he remembers roll in a 35 or 40 pound rock up his leg because it was heavy. But this person asked, but on the moon, would it not have been 4.5 pounds? What do you think about that question? He's just regurgitating one of the events of his alleged mission to the moon. Everywhere he goes, he recites that same memory over and over and over again. It's irrelevant. What's relevant is what I asked him at the beginning of the interview, which is, first of all, why are you here?

Because if I climbed down at Everest and someone said, you know, it's a conspiracy, I wouldn't waste my time. And then secondly, what's your security clearance? And he says, well, it's top secret. Okay. So why does an Apollo astronaut on a civilian mission have top secret clearance? And I said, just make sure I understand this. But if you have top secret clearance, then you have to, you can't tell your wife and you can't tell your children and you can't tell your church or your pastor, correct?

He said, yes. I said, oh, so you'd lie to your own wife, you'd lie to your own children, you'd lie to the church and you'd lie to your pastor in order to keep a top secret of the corrupt federal government. He said, yes. So there you go. He goes around and saying, you must believe him because he stamps Christianity, just like the used car salesman association, a seal of approval. And that's why I asked that he, in particular, be put on the spot because maybe the truth will come out and you'll see this guy acting like a child who got his hand caught in the cookie jar still denying that he stole a cookie, you know?

And keep in mind. And that's just how sad the world is. And Andy McNaughton is actually who reached out to us with this question. And if you look it up, I mean, a 45-pound rock, for example, on the moon would weigh about seven pounds on the moon. The mass doesn't change, but the weight does, right? And so that was a point. And it wasn't actually just Andy that reached out.

There was a few people that said, this was one of the weirdest things. Because when he said he's like, I remember these rock. is how heavy they were, you know, 35, 40 pound rock. And that was very interesting because like you remember that specifically how heavy the rock was considering like this, this big rock is, you know, 35, 40 pound rock. But yet you rolled it up your leg because, you know, it was so heavy. But yet it would really have only been about four pounds if it was 35 pounds, you know, on earth. So I think that was weird. And what I will say about Charles is, I guess, responses to, to you and and to Danny and just everybody.

it just seemed off to me. And I think it did to a lot of people. And I understand he's older. I get all that. That's what a lot of people said is like, well, he's an old man. You know, he's an old man. He's not as sharp as he used to be. You know, there's all these things.

But at the same time, it just, there was a lot of things that just did not seem like, you know, even though you might be, I don't know how old he is. How old is he like 80? Yeah, he's got to be in his 80s. 90. Oh, 90. No, he's 90. Okay.

So, Bart, do you know, what questions in specific that Danny prompt him on? Well, he basically coached him on all the points that I would bring up. The shadows intersecting, the radiation belt, the testimony of the deathbed confession. He spent 10 telephone conversations preparing the guy for my confrontation, which, you know, it's not appropriate if we're to be fair and balanced. Right. And again, I don't have any animosity toward Danny. for doing that. It wasn't like he was trying to be mean or unfair intentionally. He was just overly

concerned that he would be associated with beating up grandpa. You know, the fact is the guy remembered word for word, a private telephone conversation we had 20 years earlier. He travels by himself, no entourage, no wife, no assistant. He's in better health than me, probably, as a fat 60-year-old, and him being a lean at 90-year-old. And the guy, you know, is very sharp. We had quite an extensive private conversation afterwards where, you know, I said to him, you know, I understand if you think telling the truth will injure somebody, you know, and he teared up.

He saw that I had compassion for him. And this is one of the keys if people are true Christians. You have to love your enemy. Jesus says, if you don't love your enemy, you're no different than a pagan. Because in our world, we have the Muslims bombing the Jews. The Jews are bombing the Muslims, and the so-called Christian United States is bombing everybody else. You know, our poster child of evil in the alternative media is Bill Gates. But Bill Gates, from the cradle, was taught to be racist by his racist parents.

And based on his body language, I would say that he has a neurological disorder. And so Jesus said when he was being murdered, please forgive them, Lord, because they don't know. And people are sheep without a shepherd like we are or once were. And we need to give them amnesty and forgiveness. I would suggest that anybody coming forward with a crime of this magnitude be given amnesty in exchange for telling the truth, even if they're guilty of homicide. They're already elderly and about to meet the ultimate judge with eternal consequences. So I think the historic truth is more powerful and important than a few years of vindictive, you know, prison terms. If there's anyone alive who knows anything about the Kennedy assassination, come forward, get amnesty.

I would say that if I were president, have period, you know, the first 30 days of my presidency be pardon. And if anybody in the federal government has committed a crime, if you come forward and confess, you will be given a pardon, period. And, you know, why not? Because the truth sets us free. And the fact is mankind's greatest accomplishment is a lie. It's so significant historically that the moon and how ironic that people defend their own criminal. criminals who are enslaving them. They're, how dare you say, the moon missions are fake?

But they were fake. And people, like I said, the guy who's a professor at a college said even Neil Armstrong confessing the moon missions were fake, would not dissuade him. He would still think that they're real because he has made a God out of it. You know, my film on the homepage of subbrel.com, a funny thing happened on the way to the moon, we open up at the Tower of Babel, to reach the heavens. And it says in Genesis 6, the reason why was to show off to make a name for ourselves. And as I said, Jesus said to start a tower and abandon it proves you're a fool.

And that's maybe why they faked the moon landing primarily. They didn't want to look like a fool before the world, but they should have just admitted they bit off more than they could chew, which proves for leaders are immature. Sure. And then we show in the film the Titanic, the largest machine of the technological age, the largest machine ever built by the hand of man. They put in posters the ship that God himself could not sink. So we have the Tower of Babel never finished. We have the Titanic never made one voyage. And then we show Richard Nixon, who knew they were not on the moon, who nevertheless said putting a man on the moon is second in greatness, only to God. making the universe. It's a blasphemous boast.

The other two rebukes were known to the world, so maybe this one will be known too. Maybe it's God's sovereignty that there's a delay. I mean, imagine if the truth came out at that first press conference six weeks later, Neil Armstrong said, look, they threatened to kill me and my family. Will someone police surround my house, local police. It was a fraud. We didn't do it. I'm sorry.

it would have been long forgotten by now, right? Maybe there would have been a little reform or whatever. But imagine, you know, let's say there's a couple and one of them six weeks into their marriage is unfaithful. They could tell their partner, you know, immediately the next day. But imagine the truth coming out on their 50th anniversary after they're an elder in the church and a respective person in the community. maybe after this 55 years and ridiculing people who knew the truth and all these debunking videos, right? If you type in moon landing fraud, you don't get moon landing fraud, you get 1,0001 videos about why the moon landings must be real. I mean, come on, if I went around saying Mickey Mouse was the first president, would there be a thousand videos to reassure people? It was George Washington. They have to have those because you need reassure.

because it's made out of straw. And so maybe that's God's plan to get the truth that come out after we've been lied to for so long, for it to sink in how deceived we are. Maybe we need to pray for that, for the truth that come out. And if it doesn't, then mankind is doomed. You can't sweep it under the rug as a president and say, well, that was someone else's mistake because if it's still taught that the moon landings are real, that means the evil people have one.

You've got to be more concerned about what God thinks than man thinks. We're all going to face judgment. And even if there were no God, do you want to be remembered for all time, afraid, a coward that you hold on to your federal job instead of telling the truth about the corruption they're in, right? Those are the options. Yeah. Yeah.

And I think a lot of it is more likely they're holding on to their legacy that was created, right? If the moon landing was fake and these people were heroes, you know, they want to hang on to that rather than go down as a liar, you know? And I think that's probably the biggest threat to their, to their truth telling. Yeah, but I think what Bart is saying is that God is more powerful than lies. Absolutely. Yeah. I mean, and I think it, you know, at the end of day, all of this, you know, we look at like how corrupt the government was then and kind of as you said and explained earlier, Bards, you know, if the government could do it then, if this was kind of the breaking of the seal.

And I don't even think it was the breaking of the cell. So I think Roswell, I think whatever happened to Roswell, you know, the government lied to us. They had an initial story. Then they lied to us. We still don't know what happened on that. But regardless, you know, the Kennedy assassination. And then after that, which was the moon landing during Nixon's time.

Martin Luther King, which is Martin Luther King day today. Yeah. I mean, that was all a lie. Well, yeah. He was murdered by the government. I mean, there was. By the CIA. Yeah, there was like a four or four.

five-week trial that determined that. I mean, it was it was determined that it was a government hit, essentially. And most people don't realize that. It's like they, they, they recognize Martin Luther King Day, but they don't recognize what the actual. I was a teacher for 25 years and I was teaching out of a textbook that said, we landed on the moon and how JFK died and how Martin Luther King died and how everyone else died. And it's all lies in textbooks. Yeah. And a lot of our history, I believe, in some ways as well. But Bart, you know, there was a lot of people that wanted to get your opinion on, you know, just coming back on.

I know it was a pretty contentious, I guess, interview, debate, whatever you want to call it. I do think that everybody should go and check it out on Danny Jones show. I don't, I'll be honest with you. I've never met Danny Jones. He did have a friend of ours on his show as well. I didn't love how that interview went at all. I actually kind of, I don't think Danny was. the worst necessarily to him, but, um, but I just don't think it was conducted necessarily

fairly. The way that Bart feels, his interview was not conducted fairly either. Yeah, even though like, you know, like I said, I mean, um, Bart is, has given Danny his flowers and saying, hey, he's a cool guy. Yeah. It's just you're not the first person I've heard that from. I guess I can say. So what I will say, Bart is that a lot of our listeners reach out and said the last time you

came on, they're like, I actually liked Bart on y'all's show and his, like, the podcast episode with y'all more than i have on any show he's done so i do i do wanted to let you know that because there was a lot of people who said that so and i think this has been well and i think it's because we let you talk you know we don't interrupt you and stop you mid sentence no i mean well because we talk mostly all the time so it's like if we're going to bring some on like let him talk you know and let him get his thoughts out so what is uh what are you doing now you know as far as are you working on anything new we're obviously you have been notorious slash famous for your work against the moon landing or the moon landing hoax?

Are you working on anything now? And is there anything else besides the moon landing that you would invest the amount of time if you had all the time over again, if you could invest your time in another type of corruption lie, what would it be? I don't know. I would say that's the most significant because it's burned in people's hearts. and for the truth to come out about it would have the greatest amount of change for the better, I believe. And maybe the stock market will crash temporarily.

Maybe the dollar would crash temporarily. But it's like having gangrene limb. If you pretend you don't have it, the whole body will die. And so you have to cut it off. And the only way to do that about a lie is to tell the truth about it. You could say evolution is a great. great lie. I mean, evolution actually says a lower form of life made a higher form of life. So how could something without a brain design a brain? You know, my dog, golden retriever, I can open the hood of my car

and explain the engine to her, which is kind of like a human body, the radiator of the kidneys and the fuel pump is the heart and the electronic ignition maybe is the brain. But I could spend her whole life explaining a spark plug and she still won't comprehend it. So arrogant man thinks, well, if we can't comprehend an eternal being and design, it must mean it's not true. But the car does make itself and things don't make themselves. And there is a judgment to come. It is full of grace. All we have to do is renounce our sent. Cyrus Eugene Akers, who was the chief of security at the United States Air Force Intelligence Division Base, where the first moon landing was filmed as he was dying, first confessed he was a murderer.

And his son was there, and we have that video at subbrell.com on the homepage. And his son said, who did you kill? He said a coworker at Canyon Air Force Base. So the military police came in to investigate to give the family closure. Maybe they said the body just disappeared. And then they asked him, why did you kill him? And he said, well, we both eyewitness the fake moon landing. And my friend was going to go public.

So I killed him to keep it a secret. So the judgment to come, the denial of God and of an eternity after this is more significant than the moon landing fraud. The moon landing fraud, though, is an example that will open people's eyes to how the world is run by a bunch of liars. Jesus proved that fact, I think in Luke chapter four, when he was being tempted by the devil who took him up to a mountaintop and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and said they both. along to Lucifer, and he'll give them to whoever he wants. This is why our world leaders are a bunch of liars. They swear, I will not do this if I'm elected president. They're elected president, and they do the very thing they swore they're right. That should be illegal. When any time a politician does that, that should be their last day in office and their first day in jail. Why don't we have rules like that?

The last chapter of my book talks about what to do about this mess. How can we rearrange the government so that this tyranny doesn't happen again? Having Congress in the Senate chosen by lottery is a good example. That's what the first democracy did that lasted 500 years. If people chosen at random can decide to decide a capital case, whether they're electrocuted to death or not. I think they can decide whether or not a bottle of ketchup should say contains GMOs or not, which 90% of Americans wanted, and the president somehow has the power to veto what 90% of Americans want.

That's not a democracy. Yeah. It's not a democracy when Congress passes laws based on CIA fabrications. It says so even in Wikipedia, that the Gulf of completely made up. It even says in Wikipedia that Kennedy's cabinet suggested killing 200 Americans at random and blaming it on Cuba, so they had an excuse to go to war with Cuba. I don't know about you, but I think that's called attempted murder. Shouldn't those people who suggested that go to jail?

Well, do you know, Kennedy, by the way, Kennedy, when the Joint Chiefs of Staff came to him to proclaim that, he was like, are you freaking kidding me? That was just another reason. Kennedy always went against the system mostly. Yeah, and I think that's why also he got assassinated. Well, he continued to go again. Operation Northwoods. Yeah, he continued to go against the system. And that's a no-no.

So as far as projects I'm working on, I would love to never talk about the moon landing fraud ever again. I have written a screenplay that I hope to make as my first feature film. I would call it a spiritual fantasy. And a gentleman by the name of Kevin Sorbo is the star of the film and wants to also produce it. And we're looking to raise $3 million to do so. And hopefully we will do that. And I will never talk about the moon landing fraud ever again if I do my real dream, which is to pursue, you know, making fictionalized films I would much prefer doing.

This kind of, you know, derailed my life. I didn't plan on being that we didn't go to the moon guy. The fact is I turned down the project originally for fear. If they did fake it, I'd be risking my life. If it wasn't until I read the Bible five times from cover to cover that I realized it is worth dying for if they fake the moon landing. That's an important truth like the country and people having cancer that they need to know about. Otherwise, that lie will do them in. Again, if the truth makes us free, then lies make us slaves.

And we are enslaved by these lies. Something needs to give. And the moon landing fraud exposure is actually the number one. tool a president could use to bring down the corruptive state. And yet they're afraid to do it because of embarrassment. And you have, you know, sincere podcasters like Tucker Carlson or Glenn Beck, who say, I know America has gotten bad, but at least we went to the moon. And they won't go there. They have to realize it's worse than you think. I mean, if your pastor is a child molester, you can pretend that that's not the case. I don't want to go there. But what if they are?

Yeah. And what if they did fake them in landing? What does that mean? That's what Tucker Carlson and Glenn Beck need to realize. What would it mean if they did fake them in landing? That means it's far worse than they ever thought possible. I agree. Far gone, far over the cliff. And you need to know the depth of the cancer that you have in order to do something about it. If you deny and don't want to go there, then that cancer is going to get you. Yeah. No, I agree. Before you go on, Chad, I have one question. You're like, whatever. Do dogs go to heaven? Well, I'm not sure your individual dog goes to heaven. But from a spiritual point of view, you know, it doesn't say whether or not animals go to heaven. From a scriptural point of view, who's read the Bible from cover to cover more than once, it seems to indicate you could interpret it to say that they don't.

My personal opinion is that they do. God says that he has prepared a place for people in heaven. And the Bible also says in Revelation 21 that God will dwell with us on the earth and a new heaven and a new earth. If you had a fish as a pet, you're not going to put it on a tabletop and expect it to be happy. You're going to have to put it in water. And if we're a terrestrial being, God's going to recreate the earth like Eden, a terrestrial happiness for us. Now, if animals bring us joy, which they do, then there probably

will be animals in heaven. I would think there would be. And in fact, there's another scripture that actually indicates there will be animals in heaven. The second to the last chapter, I think, of Isaiah, which is about the last days and the future, heaven and earth. It's Isaiah that says there'll be a new heaven and a new earth, which is repeated in Revelation. And it says, in that place, the lion will lay down with the lamb and eat straw like an ox. There will be no killing in God's future kingdom. Now, I love charbrold anything, whether it's corn in the cob or a steak. However, God is a god of life.

And even though it's permissible to eat clean meat, it's better not to. because a chicken wants to be a chicken, you know, a bird wants to be a bird and a cow wants to be a cow. And God is a God of life. And he says in heaven that there will be no killing even among animals. Now, whether your personal dog, you know, the one I have there in the front yard playing with my turkey pet, their buddies, my grown turkey and my golden retriever, they play with each other, whether that particular dog would be in heaven. I don't see why not if that's what I want. Yeah. You know, if that's what would make me happy.

God is our father. And you know if you're a parent and your child, you know, in July, I really like that stuffed animal, you'll go out of your way to buy that, put it in the closet and give it to them, you know, on their birthday six months into the future. So if that's what makes us happy, I suspect that that's the way it will be. So there's some descriptors to back it up. And, you know, just kind of your understanding of God seems to indicate that. And I know it's an absurd.

But you know the answers to these things by reading the Bible. Yeah. And that's very important. I grew up Catholic. And my grandmother went to church seven days a week. And here's a quote from my Catholic grandmother who went to church seven days a week. us Catholics aren't into reading the Bible. So Jesus says in John chapter 8 that we're judged by the Word of God.

And that's why you have to read it. And that's why you know what truth is and what deception is. In fact, Second Thessalonians 2.9 says that Lucifer, who runs the world, right? And Revelation 9-11 says one of the names, names for Lucifer is Apollo. And in Second Thessalonians, it says the coming of Lucifer will be displayed in counterfeit miracles. What is putting a man on the moon? A counterfeit miracle. And whether or not people will be taken away, there's a lot of Hollywood movies. People are going to be taken away. It's called the pre-tribulation rapture belief. That was only started in 1850. That's a new theology.

The Bible says clearly, out of Jesus' own mouth, after the tribulation, that's Jesus's words, then the Son of Man will appear. And then it says in the book of Peter that the dead in Christ is first. People in Christ will rise first, not people alive. So there's the scriptures that contradict Christian teaching that is false. I believe that. Same thing. So you know that by reading the Bible. You have to read the Bible.

That's how we have a relationship with God. If God is the Word, then the only way we can have a relationship with God is reading the Word. I agree. And so it's important to know that. And what good is it to gain the whole world and forfeit yourself? So all the people who fake the Moon Landing, killed Kennedy, did the Gulf of Tunk in 9-11, whatever, whatever. they're going to gain the world and forfeit their soul. Jesus said he was not sent to the Gentiles or pagans.

He was sent to the lost sheep of Israel. So every teaching of his was you could say to the church. And to the church, he said, wide is the gate broad is the road that goes to destruction. And most people go that way. Most people who think they're saved go that way. narrow is the way to life and only a few find it. He repeated that in Matthew 24, 12 and 13, where he says, because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most believers will grow cold. But he who holds to the

end will be saved. So we have to get saved and then stay saved because it says in Hebrews 10, if we deliberately go on sinning, no sacrifice for sin is left. So that's another fault. doctrine. Once saved, always saved. No. Jesus says you have to get saved and stay faithful to the very end. Says it in Revelation, repent, or I'm going to take my light of salvation away from you. Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and not do way? What does Acts 532 say? The Holy Spirit is given to those who obey God. It's a paradox. You are saved by grace, but you can't take hold of the grace. until you let go of your sin with repenting. Jesus died for the whole world, John 316.

But it says after that, but men love darkness instead of light and will not come into the light for fear their deeds will be exposed. So even though that safety deposit box with two keys, Jesus' key of grace is turned for the whole world, most people will not turn the other key, which is to repent. With that key alone, if we repent, Without God's grace, we don't go to heaven.

However, God's grace, it says, was for the whole world, and we take a hold of that by turning our key in a relationship by repenting, you see. So that's what we have to do. That's what the Bible says, and very few churches are teaching what the Bible says, the most prolific church in the world. And a person who worshiped seven days a week therein said, we don't read the Bible. I mean, come on. But Barr, what the rules of the game are unless you read the Bible? What if we repent, but we keep sinning because we're all sinners? Well, the book of, I think, first John says we can't go on sinning if the Holy Spirit dwells in us.

And that doesn't mean we're going to be without sin forever, but it's going to plague us to the point where we do repent. It's like brushing your teeth or taking a shower. You don't do it once and say you're done for the rest of your life. It's something you have to continue to do. But it says very clearly, 1st Corinthians 6, do not be deceived. And all of this is to the church, not to pagans. It's to the church. Do not be deceived church.

The following will not inherit the kingdom of God. The fornicators. people having sex outside of marriage. They won't be saved. Do not be deceived. The liar, the drunkards, right? You can't live that life and also be saved. It says so multiple times in the Bible. So you have to repent of it. Now you can backslide, just repent again, right? That's what you have to do. No, I 100% agree with that. And, you know, we're going to do we've talked about doing a biblical series coming up for sure i would actually like to have you on for one of those shows um i've been researching very heavily brian godow is

actually one of my favorite artists i mean artists not artists but um favorite authors and i've been reading a lot of his stuff um michael heisner there's a lot of people i've been reading i've read the bible and i just i would like to bring you on bart sometime to go deep into some of this stuff because i think that the world is changing i think it's changed beyond belief in this day and I think it even goes back to the moonland and the JFK assassination and how all of this kind of works in evil's favor. As you said, you know, Satan controls the world and I think that we see that on an everyday basis.

And yet these rulers, the kingdoms always keep us fighting because that's what divides and that's how they keep on ruling. And that's how they keep lying to us. Because if you can lie to a certain amount of people and then this amount of people and then you just get them to fight over each other's lies, it works out usually for the best. but Bart, I do appreciate you coming on for sure. And obviously Bart Cybrel or subrel.com, S-I-B-R-E-L dot com. And, man, we look forward to having you back on the show.

Like I said, I just love having Bart on. He's awesome. Yeah, I think a lot of people that saw the interview was, I don't know, most, everybody we got was just like, they didn't necessarily believe Charles, the way he responded. I know you say he probably does a better job, but I think a lot of people just didn't necessarily buy it. You guys let us know out there. What did you think about the Bart and Charles, I guess, debate on Danny Jones show? But is there anything else, Bart, that you want to plug your website, obviously. Do you have social media or any of that? No, I just have my website,

subrelle.com, S is and Sam, I, B, as and boy, R-E-L, subrel.com. I've got my book, Moonman, the true story of a filmmaker on the CIA head list, which is interactive with 17 video links. It's an audio that I read myself, Kindle of Print. Then I came out with another book recently called Aliens from Planet X, which talks about the origin of these UFOs. After investigating the top two UFO researchers, Alan Hinek and Jacques Valet, they said UFOs are real, but they're not from outer space. They're from Earth, and they're demonic. So I look into the biblical origin of these aliens, which ends up being fallen angels, and that has, I think, 29 interactive video links at my website. And then the other half of the same book is about rogue planets and how science is gradually releasing the fact that there are just as many planets free floating throughout the universe as there are ones orbiting stars.

So by the earth in 705 BC, prior to which the earth had a 360-day year. That's why there's 360 degrees on a compass. So what that meant is prior to 705 BC, the earth had 12 months, and each month was exactly 30 days. 30 days per month, 12 months, tribes of Israel. How could you say that was by accident? That was actually proof of divine creation. There's no way that you could have 12 months exactly, and each one be exactly 30 days unless it was clockwork. Then this rogue planet came by, approximately seven times bigger than the Earth.

It pulled the Earth slightly farther away from the sun, causing the extra five and a quarter days to go around. That planet is nicknamed Planet Lucifer. The most powerful telescope in the world run by the Jesuits is called the Lucifer telescope. Yes, yes. One of their members said, as he was dying, that they are tracking an object that's going to play a significant part in end times. I believe they're tracking a rogue planet, planet Lucifer, which may cause the tribulation of which Jesus spoke. he said there will be the tossing and the turning of the seas. The moon right now, one quarter of the size of the earth, causes about 20 feet to go up and down on the coast every day.

Planet X would be about 30 times bigger than that, causing the tossing and the turning of the seas. You see that? And it would cause meteor storms as well. What did Jesus say? The stars fell from the sky like right. figs. He says, men's heart will melt in fear for what is coming upon the whole earth. I thought, you know, of course, Revelation is about the last days. Daniel's about the last days. But when I read Isaiah for the 10th time, I realized it's about the last days as well. It says in Isaiah 13, 13, the earth

will be moved out of its place. And that's talking about the last day. Ace, the second coming of Christ. So there may be another rogue planet coming by, which is a dead world. However, if aliens are really fallen angels in disguise who have been here for millennia and a rogue planet goes by, even though it's lifeless, they could lie and claim they live on that rogue planet. And that's why they're suddenly appearing. You see? Von Braun, who faked the moon landing, said they're going to fake an alien invasion. And that's what my book is about at subrel.com, aliens from planet X. And then I just came out with the third book.

It's the first children's book. That's a conspiracy book. It's about the moon people faking a trip to Earth under the direction of Dr. Von Rung. Oh, I love that. You can get all of that. So that's at subrel.com as well. Wow. that's that's amazing uh we actually have a good episode coming up in a couple days we're going to talk

about the deep underground military bases and the breakaway civilizations getting a little bit of the alien stuff as well we've we've definitely talked about the um ananaki the fallen angels the neflum we've talked about personal experiences with that as well yeah for sure so yeah go go check out bart's website for sure uh i'm actually going to have to go check out that book bart because that sounds very, very interesting. I would love to read that. But Bart, thank you so much again for coming on. We're going to have to bring you back on very soon to talk about something else besides

the moon landing because I think you are a wealth of knowledge and all kinds of stuff. Yeah, maybe after you read the aliens from Planet X book, we can talk about that. Absolutely. We'll definitely do it. Well, thank you so much, Bart. Guys, that was an amazing interview with Bart. I always like bringing Bart on. This is our second one, but we're going to definitely have to get to read that book and talk

about it. We do have an episode coming up in a couple of. couple days. I think it'll be out the day after tomorrow. Like I said, we're talking about a breakaway civilization, the deep underground military basis, Antarctica. We're going to kind of bring all of that in because a lot of people say that, hey, if these aliens do exist, are they really from another planet? Are they from here? And I've always kind of been on the sentiment, especially the past couple, two, three years that more along the lines of what Bart's saying, you know, this fallen angel

slash demonic realm. Interdimensional. Yeah, interdimensional type, half human, half. something right they're they're breaking into reality just like they did back in enog days right just like they did when the fallen angels came and and ascended on yeah and i think that's kind of what we've seen like with our own eyes yeah for sure it's nuts but we're going to talk about that in a couple days guys but until next time we love each and everyone you we have a new episode coming out in a couple of days and until then we'll talk to you later peace out guys peace out get to any place but where I'm at every exit's getting love I'd assure you that it's

nothing but you never saw it coming none of it then or couldn't lift you a tear on my chain let it stay I don't want it's gone before you gone before you ever think of something or just anywhere but there's a lot of fit inside a head if i knew how i let you have in the stomach turning like a girl he's so tense if only you i try to know the signs if there's none of If I left you a team It's gone me